• Welcome to ZD Forums! You must create an account and log in to see and participate in the Shoutbox chat on this main index page.

Split Timeline Elsewhere?

Joined
Nov 22, 2013
Location
Portland, OR
So, I never understood why they chose Ocarina of Time to have the canon failure ending causing a third split in the space time continuum. I mean, ANY game could have done that and still could technically.


Think about it, what if at the end of Skyward Sword, Link fails to defeat Demise and rescue Zelda, meaning Zelda dies and Demise rises to power. Presumably, to keep this theory going, Link doesn't die but instead he escapes back up to Skyloft. Demise would more than likely have no knowledge of Skyloft as he was trapped away for the extent of time it was put up there, meaning he wouldn't think to go after it. So far this would mean Zelda, AKA the reincarnate of Hylia, is dead, and probably Impa as well since she was on the surface at the time. This would mean that the people of Skyloft could seemingly never return to the surface, meaning Hyrule would never exist.

Life would carry on above the clouds while below evil will churn away. Now, I’m not sure on the logistics behind this but at some point magic will begin to return, and certain people will be able to utilize this magic, for instance, Ezlo and Vaati who, I guess in this case, are born on Skyloft as humans instead of Picorri. Vaati will know of the Master Sword that was passed down from generation to generation considering it was never placed in the Sealed Temple. He will probably still betray Ezlo for his magic cap, turning Ezlo into a green cap, and attempt to take the Master Sword only to find out that it has long since lost its power. At this point, Vaati won’t be able to take over Skyloft quite yet. The Link from this era is given the task of forging a new sacred sword so that they may protect themselves, requiring him to go down to the surface and pray the Picorri still live while under Demise’s rule. Ezlo will accompany Link on this journey because he believes it was his apprentices fault for causing a panic amongst Skyloft. To his luck, the Picorri still live, and they assist Link in forging the sword creating the Four Sword, but along the way they encounter Vaati who is searching the surface for the Triforce. Link defeats Vaati and traps him within the Four Sword, and returns to Skyloft where they place the Four Sword in a sacred shrine to protect it.

However, years pass and the sacred seal in the Four Sword is broken and Vaati escapes. Having no knowledge of the time that has passed since he was entrapped within the blade, he vows for revenge on Link and Skyloft for keeping him imprisoned. Vaati returns to the Surface in search of the Triforce, yet again. Link is again tasked with defeating Vaati and returning him to the Four Sword, however upon wielding the sword, Link is split into four entities who return to the Surface and aid Link in defeating Vaati yet again and resealing him within the Four Sword. The four Links return to Skyloft and return the Four Sword to its shrine, which also makes the four Links one again.

Generations pass, and a man named Ganondorf is born amongst the people of Skyloft. Ganondorf has huge ambitions to take over the Surface using the power of the Triforce. Ganondorf returns to the Surface and is successful in locating the Triforce but before he is able to use it he is thwarted by the goddesses who split the Triforce into three, leaving the Triforce of Power within Ganondorf, the Triforce of Courage within this generations Link, and leaving the Triforce of Wisdom within a young girl from Skyloft named Zelda, who is unknowingly the reincarnation of the goddess Hylia. Angered by the goddesses intervention, Ganondorf returns to Skyloft in search of the remaining two pieces of the Triforce. Zelda’s mentor Impa, who is named after the goddesses aid from the ancient legends and is one of the few remaining members of an ancient tribe known as the Sheikah, explains to Zelda her existence and of the power she holds. Ganondorf learns of Triforce piece hidden within Zelda and attempts to kidnap her. Understanding she is vital to stopping Ganondorf, Zelda goes to the Surface, and disguises herself as a Sheikah boy for seven years before the “Hero of Time” can save them. Meanwhile, this generations Link is undergoing training in the Knight’s Academy. When word reaches them of Ganondorf’s intentions to capture the Triforce, the knights are sent after him. All of the knights except for Link are killed in battle. Leaving Link as the last knight left, he is sent to the Surface so that he may protect the Triforce from Ganondorf, unknowing that Ganondorf had already reached the Triforce before. When Link gets to the Temple of Time, he is greeted by a mysterious man named Sheik, who entrusts Link with what he knows. Link learns that he must wait seven years before he is strong enough to defeat Ganondorf. So Link is sealed within the Temple of Time for seven long years. Upon his awakening, Sheik informs Link of what has happened in the last seven years. Ganondorf has taken over all of Skyloft forcing the people to return to the dangerous Surface. Demise has gotten word of Hylias reincarnation and searches desperately for her, as she is the only one who can stop him. Shiek reveals to Link of his true identity as the reincarnation of Hylia, Zelda. She then tells Link that he must return to Skyloft and retrieve the Master Sword from within its shrine above. From there, he must return with the sword back to the Temple of Time, where Zelda can return its power. So Link returns to Skyloft which is now under the rule of Ganondorf and safely retrieves the Master Sword. Upon which, he returns to the Temple of Time with the Master Sword where Zelda then returns its power. Link then returns to Skyloft alone, and defeats Ganondorf. When he returns to the Temple of Time, he finds out that Demise has kidnapped Zelda. Link, must then go and free Zelda, who then helps Link defeat Demise, but not before Demise vows to haunt the generations to come. At this point, Zelda returns Link to seven years prior to the incident, so that Link may warn Zelda of the events to come. Leaving this era without a hero.

At this point, I have pretty much covered Skyward Sword, Minish Cap, Four Swords, Four Swords Adventure, and Ocarina of Time.
Link is sent back in time to warn Zelda of the events that would unfold and aids her in stopping them before they occur. The people of Skyloft, return to the Surface safely, now that it is rid of both Ganondorf and Demise. Soon afterwards begins the building of Hyrule, the kingdom in which the remaining people of Skyloft will flourish.


And the rest is quite plain I hope. I don’t know why I did this, the thought just randomly happened upon me. Feel free to dispute or add on to this. I’m open to discussion. :)
 

Justac00lguy

BooBoo
Joined
Jul 1, 2012
Gender
Shewhale
This all rather relies on hypotheticals so it's hard for it to be a believable theory; however, it's quite interesting and I won't disregard it as the Defeated Timeline itself is a hypothetical twist on original events.

I have one or two problems though: presumably Demise places a "curse" upon Link, in fact it's more so a reiteration of the balance of power; the Triforce. So with this is mind, Ganondorf's existence wouldn't happen if Demise had lived - there is no need for Ganon or his evil intentions. Since you have Demise and Ganondorf alive at around the same time it kind of contradicts the balance of power.

Also, I'm slightly sceptical of all these people simply returning to the surface so easily--from Skyloft that is--and the fact that Demise is oblivious to its existence, it just all seems rather naive of him to disregard it.
 

Cfrock

Keep it strong
Joined
Mar 17, 2012
Location
Liverpool, England
Ocarina of Time has greater significance to the Timeline than any of the other games for one reason, a reason why, I feel, the split could only make sense during that game: Ocarina of Time is the first point in the chronology of the series when the Triforce separates and is given to those who would come to weild it numerous times throughout the ages.

Link's defeat at the hands of Ganon that created the Hero Defeated Timeline is not a "hypothetical" scenario, rather it is just as canonical and 'real' as the Adult and Child Timelines. It's easy to dismiss it with the idea that if Link dying creates a new timeline then it could happen in any game, which leads to the question, as it is here, of why not the other games? Well, a theory exists which attempts to answer that. I won't go into detail here but the gist is: none of the other games involve a person whose heart is not balanced touching the Triforce. Ocarina of Time is the point at which that first happens. Following that point, Zeldas, Links, and Ganondorf were in possession, or proved themselves worthy, of owning a piece of the Triforce. Ocarina of Time is the point when this starts to happen. The Triforce split into three; the timeline split into three.

The theory that the timeline split is caused by the separation of the Triforce is, like every theory, unproven, but it helps explain why the split happened the way it did and when it did as well. There is more going on than Link simply dying. We accept two separate and totally disparate realities in which he won; what is so repellant about one in which he lost?

Simply saying that the timeline could split anywhere based purely on the possibility that Link could fail doesn't prove anything or move the understanding of the timeline forward. Many things could happen. Only those which do happen are important. Ocarina of Time features a significant event that can, and does, affect the entire flow of history in Hyrule. No other point is more appropriate for providing the root of a reality in which Ganon defeated the Hero.
 

Justac00lguy

BooBoo
Joined
Jul 1, 2012
Gender
Shewhale
Cfrock said:
Simply saying that the timeline could split anywhere based purely on the possibility that Link could fail doesn't prove anything or move the understanding of the timeline forward. Many things could happen. Only those which do happen are important. Ocarina of Time features a significant event that can, and does, affect the entire flow of history in Hyrule. No other point is more appropriate for providing the root of a reality in which Ganon defeated the Hero.
I'd love to believe that something significant did happen at that time but Nintendo will never explore that moment, most likely anyway. I remember reading that theory if yours and I actually thought it made some sense. However, for now I'm just going to have to go with this being a hypothetical reality of what we know was supposed to happen.

I know, going by hypotheticals, and the multiverse theory, that this could happen anywhere; however, the reason why it happened where it did was because it was such a pivotal moment. Here you have Link and Ganon in one of the most memorable moments in gaming within one of the truly revolutionary games. Nintendo probably chose this specific moment to highlight this alternate path because it was just so significant and the fact that it made logical sense as the other splits happened around the same time frame.

I like to relate this scenario to Bioshock Infinite (spoilers ahead for those who may read and have yet to complete it). Anyway, you eventually learn the significance of "Infinite" and the possibility of literally anything. There can be millions and billions of alternate worlds where Booker exists and said events will play out differently. However, we only play in one of those worlds for the most part... So I guess you could say this isn't that significant when you realise the grand scheme of things, well I would relate this to the Defeated Timeline. This hypothetical split could happen anywhere at any time, in fact, if you truly believe in the multiverse theory then you could make a case for infinite worlds at any time. However, this specific moment is more significant than most as why Nintendo probably analysed it and came to the conclusion that it was the best to follow. Think about it... they where probably brainstorming when they suddenly thought "what if Ganondorf was the victor?" - it's an interesting scenario and one that could piece the puzzle together.

I do want to believe that something odd did occur that would explain this, but right now I'm going with Nintendo showing us what could have happened if that pivotal moment played out differently.
 

Cfrock

Keep it strong
Joined
Mar 17, 2012
Location
Liverpool, England
The problem with the "Many Worlds" idea (in general, not in relation to Zelda) is that if there are an infinite number of universes to allow everything to be possible, then there has to be one universe in which multiple universe don't exist.

That's more of a thought experiment than anything else. The thing is, we really have to consider two reasons for why the Hero Defeated timeline comes about: an in-universe reason and an in-real life reason.

The in-universe explanation is not clear, as you say. It probably never will be. The theory that the split is directly connected to the Triforce is just that, a theory. It can't be proven, it just provides a framework that explains some of the mysteries. Crucially, for me at least, it's not based on a "what if" scenario. It provides a reason for why the timeline split the way it did that was more than just "because". I don't like "because". It's too unsatisfying.

If you think about an in-real life explanation, the liklihood is probably that Nintendo needed to start the third split somewhere and Ocarina of Time already had two branches so it would be tidier to plop the third one there, too. Whether they truly did have a "master document" for years and years doesn't really make much difference; any significant change in the timeline would end up associated witht he franchise's most significant game. That was just always going to happen.

We can hold up our hands and say Nintendo put the split where they did because it was easy, but if we were the kind of people to say that then we wouldn't have a theory section, would we? In-universe explanations are much more entertaining to try to figure out. I just think calling certain aspects of canon "hypotheticals" isn't going to further our understanding of events. It kind of feels like the question is just being filed away for another day, instead of being examined.

The third split comes from Ocarina of Time; that is absolute at this point. Whether you accept it or don't, whether it makes sense or doesn't, it is there and it is not going anywhere. Instead of asking "Why didn't this happen somewhere else along the timeline?" I think it's more important to ask "Why did it happen here?" That's where potential answers lie, if you ask me.
 

Justac00lguy

BooBoo
Joined
Jul 1, 2012
Gender
Shewhale
We can hold up our hands and say Nintendo put the split where they did because it was easy, but if we were the kind of people to say that then we wouldn't have a theory section, would we? In-universe explanations are much more entertaining to try to figure out. I just think calling certain aspects of canon "hypotheticals" isn't going to further our understanding of events. It kind of feels like the question is just being filed away for another day, instead of being examined.

The third split comes from Ocarina of Time; that is absolute at this point. Whether you accept it or don't, whether it makes sense or doesn't, it is there and it is not going anywhere. Instead of asking "Why didn't this happen somewhere else along the timeline?" I think it's more important to ask "Why did it happen here?" That's where potential answers lie, if you ask me.
I thoroughly agree with you in regards to "in-game explanation" and "in real life explanation", hell, what would theorising be if we simply sought out a perfectly logical in real life reason? I'm not really trying to just put this on Nintendo here. I mean of course they probably didn't plan out how or why the split occurred where it did. They probably thought a "What if Ganon won?" scenario was an interesting way to go. However, it's hard to avoid since the answer is seemingly obscure I've been trying to come up with my own explanation and have yet to find a perfectly flawless and logically solution without going into full on speciation.

However, I think separate worlds is common theme throughout the entire series - the alternate realms, splits in time and seemingly from foreign worlds; some of which draw comparisons to a simple dream world. I look at the three Timelines and I see three universes out of another million/billion that also coexist (multiverse theory) yet we only get to experience those three. This is why I referenced Bioshock Infinite, we are playing through one world (for the most part) and at the end we see the possibility of infinite more and actually explore many alternate worlds where said events where.. well, altered. This kind of relates to what we see with the Defeated Timeline: we see one hypothetical world put of many others that could occur.

So, in reality, the Zelda universe--much like our own--has parallel worlds. Take Termina for example: this world is very much an altered reality that coexists with its counterpart, Hyrule. So Termina is very much a parallel world. At some point in time it was probably a part of Hyrule but an altered path led to what we see in Majora's Mask. Now there could be many other parallel worlds such as Termina. In truth I wouldn't be surprised if we see more in the future; however, we only get to see Termina when in theory there could be billions more.

I know I'm probably going into theories that far surpass the simplicity of the series, but I just see the Defeated Timeline as one alternate world out of an infinite number that we actually get to experience. It's just that Nintendo thought this specific scenario sounded more logical and interesting for them to eventually choose. I'd love to one day figure out what happened, or read upon a theory that makes logical sense, but somehow I just can't see that happening.
 
Last edited:

Cfrock

Keep it strong
Joined
Mar 17, 2012
Location
Liverpool, England
I think I understand your point better now. Your not saying the Hero Defeated line is just a hypothetical they threw in for the sake of it, but rather that it's just one particular parellel world they have decided to show us. There could be more, we just don't know/haven't been shown them. Would that be right?

Is suppose that covers the big questions about the third split. But it does lead to a similar set of questions as before: Why haven't we been shown these other potential splits? or, better yet, why have we been shown this one specifically? Again, in-real life explanation is probably just a simple "Because we could make that fit and it was easy," but I'd be much more interested in finding out what you think is an in-universe explanation. Why do we have a record of three separate histories from this specific point (Ocarina of Time) and not of all the others which have existed throughout the series? Could be fun to try and answer that at some point.

The idea that Termina is a branch of what was once Hyrule--that the two worlds share a single history up to a point when they diverge--is an interesting one that I've not come across before. I'm probably going to spend a bit of time thinking about that.
 
Joined
Nov 27, 2013
The Ocarina split always made complete sense to me. Zelda fractured the timeline by sending Link back to before Ganondorf made his move. There's no way it doesn't cause a paradox if Link uses information from the future to prevent said future from ever occuring.

The Adult timeline is Link's victory. It is the triumph of the Triforce of Courage. However with Hyrule being a wreck that's not so much a victory for Zelda, so she does something about it.

The Child timeline is Zelda's victory. After seven long years of seeing Hyrule laid waste, she yet finds a way to save the kingdom. Triumph of the Triforce of Wisdom.

However, the timeline already being splintered and therefore weakened...Power also finds a way to assert it's victory.

To sum it up, Zelda made a soft spot that allowed all three forces to win in balance. The reason no other timeline splits have been noted is that no other known attempt has been made to radically alter the flow of events to the point of creating a paradox on this scale.

As for real world reasons, I'd say that it just suited the story. It's always been about the number three, from the Triforce to Ganon's trident.
 

Beauts

Rock and roll will never die
Joined
Jun 15, 2012
Location
London, United Kingdom
I think the only other game that would create a theoretical split or even multiple splits would be Majora's Mask. There is plenty of time travel in that game across those three days, and every trip back and forth speeding time up or slowing it down could make a potential timeline split.
 
Aww... It looks like the party started without me. Well, let's begin:

Ganon said:
ANY game could have done that and still could technically.
As I've said in another thread (quite recently, actually), this is exactly why I reject the Hyrule Historia timeline. They've forced themselves into a corner in which the timeline becomes a timeweb.

Cfrock said:
Simply saying that the timeline could split anywhere based purely on the possibility that Link could fail doesn't prove anything or move the understanding of the timeline forward. Many things could happen. Only those which do happen are important. Ocarina of Time features a significant event that can, and does, affect the entire flow of history in Hyrule. No other point is more appropriate for providing the root of a reality in which Ganon defeated the Hero.
My problem with this is that the event you speak of does not warrant another branch of the timeline. I should guess that you are talking about the splitting of the Triforce, which I will give you as an influential event, but I do not believe it to be influential enough to cause the split.

Cfrock said:
We accept two separate and totally disparate realities in which he won; what is so repellant about one in which he lost?
The problem with such a reality is not that Link lost (as some would answer), it is the aftermath of that loss. All things considered, Nintendo picked the game where it would make the least sense to have a defeated split. The reason it doesn't make sense is that nothing would happen. Due to the course of events in OoT, Link would have to be defeated in the adult era. Following such a defeat in the adult era, at worst, Hyrule would remain as it had been for the past seven years: in a state of panic and utter despair. As for the child era, it is impossible for Link to be defeated because Ganondorf is taken down before he can even strike. Anything that could happen due to the absence of a hero has either already happened or never will happen. As much as I love to hate it, I must use the Hyrule Historia timeline to explain why nothing would (or perhaps even could) happen should Link fail. The two key branches are the Adult branch and the Defeated branch. In the Adult branch, Ganondorf is resurrected, there is no hero to stop him, and the world gets flooded. In the Defeated timeline, the Sealing War happens, then we move right into aLttP. An interesting note is that Hyrule is sealed before the flood in the Adult branch, yet the Sealing War occurs on the Defeated branch. I doubt Ganondorf would just let Hyrule be sealed without a fight. Another point, Ganon is revived in the first game to take place after OoT in the Defeated timeline. And the key phrase is "Ganon is revived" not "Ganon is released/escapes". Why is this? No game explaining it has taken place between aLttP and OoT, and I highly doubt the Sealing War did much against him, so I can only assume it is the sealing of Hyrule.

It is simply illogical. There are too many inconsistencies. Your thoughts for the real life explanation of the Defeated branch is pretty much spot on. I'm tempted to say that Nintendo just threw darts at a wall and arranged the timeline according to what they landed on. A timeline split due to defeat has no relevance to OoT unless you truly force it. What occurs in the Adult branch should occur in the Defeated branch because either way the fight goes, it results in the absence of a hero and Ganondorf's reign over Hyrule. The two outcomes yield nearly identical results. Link wins, Ganondorf is eventually resurrected and rises to some amount of power, there is no hero, the world is flooded. Link loses, Ganondorf maintains his power, there is no hero, the world should be flooded. In this particular instance, Link's defeat changes nothing.

The only game where I can see a split like this being appropriate is Zelda II. In all the other games where Ganon's resurrection is a focus point, Link defeats him after he is revived. But Zelda II is the only game where Ganon can only be revived if Link is defeated. It is stated outright that Link's blood is required for Ganon's resurrection. Because of that, it is in this game that Link would not fail because Ganon is revived, but Ganon would be revived because Link fails.

justac00lguy said:
the Zelda universe--much like our own--has parallel worlds.

While this is a satisfying explanation for the splits in the timeline, it creates infinite possibilities and, by extension, infinite confusion in Zelda's already unstable continuity. I don't deny this idea, and I do admit that this paragraph is more about my personal opinion and opposition to defeat timelines in general. That being said, I do think Nintendo had some tricks up their sleeves from the very beginning, but I doubt they have several universes' worth.

Whew... That was quite the rant. I apologize for my long-winded opinions, and thank you for reading through all of it.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom